Confused by this protestant

[IgnatianPhilo]

Messianicism. They think in denying “Christian” celebrations that they are returning the legitimate form of Christianity which was practised by the apostles, one they view as entirely Jewish with but the thinnest reflection on Jesus Christ. That law is the centre for them, not Jesus.

In regards to Christmas I am not so much able to explain the origins of it, although I see nothing wrong with celebrating the birth of Christ on that day and reflecting upon it. Easter however is a different story. One important thing about Easter is that it is only called Easter in English and German, not in greek or other languages. When the early church referred to “easter” it was calling it “passover” that is “pascha” in the greek. This is an important point of refutation for the idea that Easter is a pagan invention. It is not. Rather what Easter is, is the gradual reflection on what the passover really is. I believe this started early with the apostles who incorporated Christ’s narrative of sacrifice primarily over the exodus of Israel from Egypt. Melito of Sardis, who was a Jewish Christian in the second century, bears witness of this in his Peri Pascha.

 

[adf417]

Jewish, Christian, Protestant, Catholic yada yada yada; study the origins of today’s “Christian” holidays for yourself. Then make an informed intelligent decision. If you are willing to set “what it means to me” and “well I think” aside and honestly examine the root of what is called “Christian” in modern day holiday celebration you may be very surprised.
But you have to do that for yourself; my wife and I don’t do Christmas or Easter. We do celebrate Thanksgiving if you would even call it “celebrating”. Valentine’s Day, Birthdays, Reindeer, snowmen, and bunnies are not on our calender though.

On the bold…be careful!

Gen 3:11-13

11Then God asked: Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat? 12The man replied, “The woman whom you put here with me—she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate it.” 13The LORD God then asked the woman: What is this you have done? The woman answered, “The snake tricked me, so I ate it.

2Pet 1:22

For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

1Tim 3:15

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

Mt 16:18

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

2Thes 2:15

Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.

Moral of this story - Old fast to what the church teaches because no man is an island.

Peace!!!

 

[SyroMalankara]

Some kind of fringe protestant sect or Rastafarian… “Yah”??

Just and digitally walk away:thumbsup:

 

[Covenanter]

May I ask why? Why not celebrate the Birth of Our Lord? Whether He was born on Dec 25th, Dec 15th, Jan 3rd or in June; the date doesn’t matter. We are celebrating what the Gospel tells us regarding the Birth of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

What’s so unholy about celebrating the anniversary of His coming into this world?

Let me say first of all - I have no problem with anybody setting aside a particular day for a special sort of spiritual observance. If somebody should wish to remember Christ’s birthday on December 25th, then there is no problem with that, as it is an appropriate use of their liberty as a Christian to do so. The scripture says:

One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. (Romans 14:5-6)

My problem with Christmas arises when this Christian liberty to observe or not observe any day is taken away. And yet, the Catholic Church has marked Christmas as a ‘Holy Day of Obligation’ in which the believer must participate. In doing so, it takes from us that liberty which is established by scripture, and returns us in a way to the bondage of the law, with all its rituals and observances. The forced observance of days is one of those “beggarly elements” that Paul warns us against, and admonished the Galatians for returning to:

But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Galatians 4:9-11)

The problem of course was not the the Galatians privately chose to observe certain days; but rather, that they demanded the observance of them amongst all the congregation. If it is unlawful to observe those days once commanded by God, how much more those established by men?

The church has no authority to bind us in those matters which the scripture establishes as belonging to liberty of conscience.

All this aside, I have issues with the particular manner in which Christmas tends to be celebrated. For example, the misrepresentations of the story of Christ’s birth presented in the Gospels, the use of nativity scenes which violate the Second Commandment, etc.

Do you celebrate other birthdays?

Peace!!!

Yes, but I do not obligate my brethren to celebrate them in church.

 

[adf417]

The church has no authority to bind us in those matters which the scripture establishes as belonging to liberty of conscience.

Greetings Covenanter,
There are those in this world using this same argument to justify abortion and homo sexual acts and I assume your conversations with those people will result in difference of interpretations of said scriptures. So, in this scenario, where you are having this discussion/argument with someone over abortion, who is the “you” in Mt18:18?

Mt18:18
Truly I tell you

, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Yes, but I do not obligate my brethren to celebrate them in church.

Fair enough! Thanks for the clarification.

Peace!!!

 

[Covenanter]

Greetings Covenanter,
There are those in this world using this same argument to justify abortion and homo sexual acts and I assume your conversations with those people will result in difference of interpretations of said scriptures. So, in this scenario, where you are having this discussion/argument with someone over abortion, who is the “you” in Mt18:18?

The observance of days is explicitly stated in scripture to be a matter of liberty of conscience. As a Catholic, is it not your belief that the traditions of the church must not contradict scripture? How do you reconcile the status of Christmas as a ‘Holy Day of Obligation’ with the scriptural teaching that the observance of days is a matter for liberty of conscience?

Abortion and homosexuality are also both explicitly condemned by scripture, and this teaching is reaffirmed by the authority of my church. I thus can be confident in having the backing of scriptural truth and my church when debating those who would advocate for such things.

 

[adf417]

The observance of days is explicitly stated in scripture to be a matter of liberty of conscience. As a Catholic, is it not your belief that the traditions of the church must not contradict scripture? How do you reconcile the status of Christmas as a ‘Holy Day of Obligation’ with the scriptural teaching that the observance of days is a matter for liberty of conscience?.

Greetings Coventanter, I hope you are having a blessed day.

I will be glad to address your question as to How do I reconcile the status of Christmas as a Holy Day once you have answered the previous question as to who is the “you” in Mt18:18 and also the unanswered question in post #75 in the other thread…forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=914488&page=5

They are all tied together under the precept of authority.

Abortion and homosexuality are also both explicitly condemned by scripture, and this teaching is reaffirmed by the authority of my church. I thus can be confident in having the backing of scriptural truth and **my church **when debating those who would advocate for such things.

You speak as though there are many authorities.

Peace!!!

 

[Covenanter]

Greetings Coventanter, I hope you are having a blessed day.

I will be glad to address your question as to How do I reconcile the status of Christmas as a Holy Day once you have answered the previous question as to who is the “you” in Mt18:18 and also the unanswered question in post #75 in the other thread…forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=914488&page=5

They are all tied together under the precept of authority.

Thanks for the blessings, I hope you are having a blessed day as well!

The “you” in Matthew 18:18 would appear to be Jesus’ disciples. Regarding your post in the other thread (which I intend to reply to properly in that thread), I would say that there are precedents within the history of the church to argue for both the Protestant and the Catholic canon, and neither match exactly to the primitive canons which were proposed by various authority figures in the early church.

Ultimately though, both canons accept Romans and Galatians, which are the two I have raised in support of my argument in this thread.

Hopefully I have cleared the way for you to answer my earlier question about whether you feel obligatory holy days contradict scriptural teaching on liberty of conscience in this matter.

You speak as though there are many authorities.

Peace!!!

Of course there are, scripture itself establishes several authorities!

 

[adf417]

Thanks for the blessings, I hope you are having a blessed day as well!

Thanks!

The “you” in Matthew 18:18 would appear to be Jesus’ disciples. Regarding your post in the other thread (which I intend to reply to properly in that thread), I would say that there are precedents within the history of the church to argue for both the Protestant and the Catholic canon, and neither match exactly to the primitive canons which were proposed by various authority figures in the early church.

Ultimately though, both canons accept Romans and Galatians, which are the two I have raised in support of my argument in this thread.

Ok, see other thread.

Hopefully I have cleared the way for you to answer my earlier question about whether you feel obligatory holy days contradict scriptural teaching on liberty of conscience in this matter.

I do not feel obligatory holy days contradict scripture anymore than the necessity to baptize infants or having worship services on Wednesday.

Of course there are, scripture itself establishes several authorities!

:nope: Only one authority along with one God, One Church!

Peace!!!

 

[DebChris]

The Church uses the word “obligation” for what is truly a privilege. Yes, we are “required” to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligations. We receive spiritual food just as we would receive nutritional food for our physical bodies. We are required to eat in order to remain healthy. The Church calls us to remain spiritually healthy.
The Church calendar begins with Advent leading to the birth of Jesus Christ. Our Lord became incarnate. God became Man, a central dogma of Christianity. So should we not celebrate?
The Catholic Church marks important events of the life of Christ leading to the salvation of mankind throughout the year. This is what we celebrate leading to the greatest celebration of all which is Easter. Easter of course culminates with the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
We can look at obligation as drudgery, as something that must be done, or as the reality that for lack of a better word, the Church celebrates salvation history over the course of the year and invites everybody to join the celebration.
As you read Scripture, you will find that the Hebrew people were called to these celebrations for the same reason. They are a part of salvation history.

 

[JRKH]

Of course there are, scripture itself establishes several authorities!

Could you elaborate on this please?

Peace
James

 

[Kliska]

The Church uses the word “obligation” for what is truly a privilege. Yes, we are “required” to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligations. We receive spiritual food just as we would receive nutritional food for our physical bodies. We are required to eat in order to remain healthy. The Church calls us to remain spiritually healthy.
The Church calendar begins with Advent leading to the birth of Jesus Christ. Our Lord became incarnate. God became Man, a central dogma of Christianity. So should we not celebrate?
The Catholic Church marks important events of the life of Christ leading to the salvation of mankind throughout the year. This is what we celebrate leading to the greatest celebration of all which is Easter. Easter of course culminates with the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
We can look at obligation as drudgery, as something that must be done, or as the reality that for lack of a better word, the Church celebrates salvation history over the course of the year and invites everybody to join the celebration.
As you read Scripture, you will find that the Hebrew people were called to these celebrations for the same reason. They are a part of salvation history.

I think that all is good, but on the flip side, the RCC has declared it a mortal sin if one misses mass. If one misses mass knowingly and deliberately and then passes away without perfect contrition, that, according to the RCC can and will send the person to Hell.

 

[JRKH]

I think that all is good, but on the flip side, the RCC has declared it a mortal sin if one misses mass. If one misses mass knowingly and deliberately and then passes away without perfect contrition, that, according to the RCC can and will send the person to Hell.

This statement is in error on a couple of points.
First, your statement “If one misses mass knowingly and deliberately…”, needs to have this added to it…AND without a good reason. There are any number fo cases where a person knowingly and deliberately misses mass without committing a mortal sin.
Secondly, on the matter of dying without perfect contrition. One is in danger of hell if one passes away without 'repenting of" a mortal sin…the contrition need not be perfect to avoid hell…Indeed many of us have imperfect contrition for our sins.

Attending mass on Sunday is a grave matter - that is - it is important that we do so. It helps us to obey the command to keep the Lords day Holy. For this reason we need to make our best effort to get to mass. If we knowingly and willingly - and without sufficient cause - neglect this duty (and privilege) it is a grave matter indeed…What does it say about one’s Love for God?

Peace
James

 

[Kliska]

This statement is in error on a couple of points.
First, your statement “If one misses mass knowingly and deliberately…”, needs to have this added to it…AND without a good reason. There are any number fo cases where a person knowingly and deliberately misses mass without committing a mortal sin.
Secondly, on the matter of dying without perfect contrition. One is in danger of hell if one passes away without 'repenting of" a mortal sin…the contrition need not be perfect to avoid hell…Indeed many of us have imperfect contrition for our sins.

Attending mass on Sunday is a grave matter - that is - it is important that we do so. It helps us to obey the command to keep the Lords day Holy. For this reason we need to make our best effort to get to mass. If we knowingly and willingly - and without sufficient cause - neglect this duty (and privilege) it is a grave matter indeed…What does it say about one’s Love for God?

Peace
James

Nothing you say contradicts my underlying point; if a Catholic knowing and willingly misses mass with full knowledge of the mortal sin of it, and in a way that does indeed amount to a mortal sin in Catholic teaching and that individual dies with a mortal sin on their soul, they go to Hell, from Catholic teaching. That makes “Days of Obligation” truly an obligation, it doesn’t take the carrot away but a mortal sin is a big stick. It is hard, outside of the RCC to see how that fits in with Paul’s admonition to not let anyone judge you in the keeping of days.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Nothing you say contradicts my underlying point; if a Catholic knowing and willingly misses mass with full knowledge of the mortal sin of it, and in a way that does indeed amount to a mortal sin in Catholic teaching and that individual dies with a mortal sin on their soul, they go to Hell, from Catholic teaching. That makes “Days of Obligation” truly an obligation, it doesn’t take the carrot away but a mortal sin is a big stick. It is hard, outside of the RCC to see how that fits in with Paul’s admonition to not let anyone judge you in the keeping of days.

I think I’ll stick with Church teaching, instead of a Protestant’s personal interpretation.

 

[Kliska]

I think I’ll stick with Church teaching, instead of a Protestant’s personal interpretation.

That’s not my interpretation, that is the RCC’s teaching about mortal sin on one’s soul at the time of death, and what that means.

2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor. Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

That’s not my interpretation, that is the RCC’s teaching about mortal sin on one’s soul at the time of death, and what that means.

2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor. Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

I was talking about the whole “keeping of days” thing. Not mortal sin.
From what I understand is that you don’t think that the church should have Holy Days of Obligation because of an excerpt of scripture. I would rather stick with what the Church teaches, not your personal interpretation.

Also, the whole what should and shouldn’t be mandated by the church really isn’t on topic of what I asked about in the OP.

 

[mskejj]

I think that all is good, but on the flip side, the RCC has declared it a mortal sin if one misses mass. If one misses mass knowingly and deliberately and then passes away without perfect contrition, that, according to the RCC can and will send the person to Hell.

The Catholic Church takes the commandments very seriously. For the Jews, breaking the commandments led to PHYSICAL death by stoning…,including breaking the Sabbath. For Catholic Christians breaking the 3rd commandment of keeping Holy the Lord’s Day results in grave sin which leads to SPIRITUAL death…which is far worse. Fortunately we have a merciful God who forgives us when we repent. There is nothing we can give God or do for Him that He doesn’t already have or can do better. …the only thing we can really give Him is ourself…and He will never take it from us. We give Him ourselves at mass…if we don’t go…he respects our choice. but we are the ones who lose out when we refuse the very gift he wants to give us in exchange…Himself.

 

[JRKH]

Nothing you say contradicts my underlying point; if a Catholic knowing and willingly misses mass with full knowledge of the mortal sin of it, and in a way that does indeed amount to a mortal sin in Catholic teaching and that individual dies with a mortal sin on their soul, they go to Hell, from Catholic teaching. That makes “Days of Obligation” truly an obligation, it doesn’t take the carrot away but a mortal sin is a big stick. It is hard, outside of the RCC to see how that fits in with Paul’s admonition to not let anyone judge you in the keeping of days.

First let us tackle the matter of mortal sin. What many people miss is that the thing that makes a sin mortal is less about the object and more about knowledge and will. If you knowingly and willfully do that which deeply offends God…then you are rejecting God and His plan of salvation for you. This is why something is a mortal sin.

Now to the issue of “keeping of days” being grave matter and Paul’s statement on the subject. As someone above already said, the Church takes the commandments seriously. She also takes the sacraments - given to us by God - seriously. She teaches us of their importance and warns us of the consequences of our taking them lightly or ignoring them. She does not force us to abide by them.

So - based on the above, no one is “judging” anyone on the “keeping of days”. We are simply informed of their importance - the graces available by properly attending to them and the consequences of failing to properly attend to them.

Hope this helps you understand the Catholic view on the matter

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Something that I should have added to the above…

Kliska - Something the protestant needs to keep in mind that the Catholic mass is something quite different from many protestant services. At the Catholic mass Christ is physically present in the Eucharist…Body Blood Soul and divinity. Therefore as Catholics we view this as something quite important and unique.
We go to mass to physically commune with and to consume the Body and Blood of our Lord - just as He himself commanded us to do,

I may not be explaining this very well…but it speaks to something profoundly different than many protestant beliefs and services - and might help you to understand why the Church teaches as she does…

Peace
James